The art posted at the top banner of the site

Like I posted in it’s own topic, the one with the tattoo is blatantly pornographic. Is this sort of thing usually allowed?

1 Like

Not safe for work, sure, but nudity or partial nudity on it’s own doesn’t really qualify as pornographic (at most, I’d say erotic artwork.). In my book, at least. I assume if moderators taken issue, they wouldn’t have featured it. That said, I haven’t looked at the main post itself, so I can’t say much about that, but I don’t think the thumbnail shown breaks any guidelines.

Artistic nudity has always been permitted on the forum. The artwork you’re referring to does not break any our guidelines in that regard.

6 Likes

Okay, well, enjoy your “not porn”. I’ll be looking for a new forum.

Why is pornographic content showing in the featured bar? Posts containing this content should have some warning about the inappropriate content contained in them and should NEVER be featured, especially now that the featured bar cannot be hidden. For example the title should say “Warning: Contains Nudity”. Not restricting this content is especially dangerous for young males and by allowing it the forum could potentially become a free porn hub.

Um, where? Serious question.

Australia’s previous Prime Minister regularly gets around in budgie smugglers, and did even when he was PM. As for women in small bikinis, Australian beaches are full of them. And yes, some beaches are topless, even on Sydney Harbour, but the woman in the featured bar is facing the other way.

I honestly cannot see anything here that would be dangerous for young males, nor can I see anything that would lead to this site becoming Pornhub 2.0.

3 Likes

What kind of danger? The :ok_hand::eggplant: = :see_no_evil: kind? Do elaborate.

Watch out for image search. It’s a doozy.

3 Likes

Extremism/radicalism is way more dangerous than the harmless depiction of a human being of the female gender.
Maybe you need to rearrange or better damp your extreme values and views a little bit.

2 Likes

I’ll repeat Jason’s statement here:

Of course it’s always possible that these guidelines don’t match your personal view - as with anything in the world. That doesn’t mean we need to change them.

4 Likes

remember, its a big world with lots of religions of varying tolerance. the simplest thing to do is add an option to disable featured row and call it a day.

in my personal opinion, art work like that is within tolerance. nothing that isnt more then prevalent in todays world.

2 Likes

maybe just put a “nsfw, click to see the image on the thread” overlay on the image could be enough.

but yeah, risqué, but not porn

Would you be disgusted at a female walking down your street in as little clothing as in the featured image. I guess not, but most people would. I also think most people would term the person causing the disgust the extremist not the people being disgusted.

Just because drug abuse is more prevalent in todays world it doesn’t make it right.

Since I was born and risen with an open mind in a country where the free body culture is a thing even as I got to know recently on beaches which aren´t signposted as such, people seem to be practising it.
Being prude won´t help and its tiresome and fruitless to have an angry mind over the bodies of others.

1 Like

thats not even a real person! its a pile of geometry that some fancy math formulas created a plausible representation of a human.

painted pictures are splats of color that the mind perceives as a person.

its just a bunch of mind tricks. its the difference of implied and stated.

im not saying there exists art that doesnt cross lines, but i have yet to see it on this forum.

While there are personal liberties with the definition, not everyone is viewing from a personal device - “Their sand box, their rules” applies to both the site and to company-owned system. Since more people are using Blender in a commercial environment, where that “safe for work” bar is placed should be of greater concern. That doesn’t necessarily come down to outright censorship for all, but it would be nice to have some kind of work-safe switch.

It would be interesting to know what country those who find disturbing / pornographic the image in matter are from and/or what kind of culture / believes they belong to.
I mean, what’s the nature of this cultural conflict with BA?
Geography? Religion? Family education?.. Else?

1 Like

It would be nice for the forum to enforce some decency standards when people post images, but I don’t think it has been anything other than “no pornographic images” since the site’s inception back in 2002.

Unfortunately, it’s pretty much the same for every single major art/creative software site on the internet. Heck it’s even the same for standalone art museums (our local taxpayer-funded art museum has full female nudes in its restaurant in full view of kids wandering the lobby, and this is in a conservative city in a conservative state).

1 Like

I don’t agree that the image was pornographic - or even inappropriate for this site.

However - could do without things like that appearing in the banner though as definitely NSFW. The last thing i’d need is somebody like the OP submitting a complaint to HR because they passed by my desk and clocked that image on my screen.

now even the mods are getting flagged? what happened with this thread.

anyway, maybe an option in the profile settings to hide risqué content (needing to click on the image to see it) and a way for the author and mods to flag it would be anough. i’m almost sure i’ve seen it in other forums